Did anyone really need to look past the first pic to know who this was? And Timm, those tweets sound like him -- I don't think he'd need someone else to ghost them.

Quoting a 17th century European source about 19th century American photographs seems rather silly and pointless. In the course of my historical research, I read entire runs of newspapers from the 19th century on Google Newspaper archive and this issue did, in fact, come up in an opinion piece (sadly, I don't recall the paper but it was probably one from Nova Scotia.) The writer opined, much as Twain did, that it was risky to have to hold a smile until it looked forced, fixed, and frozen (and stupid), so, even though it made people look grim, they usually chose to simply let the face relax as naturally as possible so the position could be held. Photographs were expensive and people were loath to take a risk of spending the money on something that would look foolish.

Looks like something that could inhabit Night Vale. (BTW if you haven't heard of Welcome to Night Vale, you should (hear it, that is, it's a free podcast series on iTunes.) Creative, bizarre, funny (luckily I have a 13 year old daughter who keeps me up on these things!) Seriously, I have nothing to do with the show, I am just seriously impressed by it (and if this picture appeals to you, the podcast most certainly will!)

The problem with these, as I recall from the 70s, is that unless you have a backside like an 11 year old boy, it's one of the least flattering pieces of apparel when viewed from behind.

I think the Groom probably Sued the Bride of Four MONTHS, not mouths (although that is an interesting image.)

As someone who "talks with her hands" this would be a disaster waiting (briefly) to happen.

I am SO glad they did not keep with the ever-younger trend. I just couldn't get into the Matt Smith incarnation I think, in part, because he seemed too young and bumbling, and, well, stupid. (I like my Doctors brilliant thank you.) I think my heart will always belong to 10 (with a soft spot for 9) but I'm willing to give this new one a try.

Seriously -- this is an awful idea. (Frank's sign in particular is utterly unreadable in its after format.) And as has been stated, a professional sign looks like advertising, not a personal plea from someone purportedly hungry and homeless.

The princes in the tower story is quite false but (thanks in part to Shakespeare) poor Richard III remains falsely maligned. In my freshman year of college, my history professor assigned The Daughter of Time, by Josephine Tey because it tells the REAL story of what happens (by way of a modern-day cop realizing that the case against Richard is ridiculous and never appeared during his lifetime.) But more importantly, it underscores how easily history can be twisted when the victors write their version of it.

I have NEVER understood why people have a problem eating in a restaurant unless there is another person at the table. Why? Are they afraid people will somehow judge them? Anyone who would do so is someone whose opinion is beneath notice! If you're that uncomfortable drinking in your surroundings and savoring your meal, read a book. But, as to the single-diner restaurant featured --yuck. The stark and unfriendly design turns me right off (especially the table with the wall inches from the diner's face.)

If you stay at an on-site resort, you pretty much get fast-passed anyway -- without scamming.

Seriously -- shopping carts are mega-expensive -- like in the couple hundred dollar plus range. It's actually a very EXPENSIVE fire pit made of stolen goods.

Umm, yeah. "chestburster" isn't what most people are going to think of when they see this, especially from the side.